• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Hypatia Transracialism Controversy

Emily's Cat said:
I see a much larger, more far-reaching and long-term danger in that than I do in some limited legislation that can be challenged and fought through the exercise of the free speech and due process.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Travis said:
1) I don't understand why people get upset over transracialism. It doesn't harm anyone so...have at it.
Click to expand...

It was partially ruined by Rachel Dolezal. You may remember her as "that white woman that suddenly decided she was black when it became convenient, and then declared herself more black than a guy who had actually been black his entire life, and had no choice in the matter." Never mind that she had sued her college for discriminating against her because she was white. It also brings to mind people like Abby "Becky with the Bad Grades" Fischer, who insisted that "her" spot at a college was "taken" by black and Latino students, when she was really just a very unimpressive student. Or, as another example, those snotty college republicans that hold "Affirmative Action bake sales" and think they've made a coherent point.

Fundamentally, the truth is that many people (though not most at this point) are still hostile to minorities, and there's no real way for black and Latino folks to avoid it. Don't pass? You get to be on your guard against such people every time you're around them. You *do* pass? Well, you get to hear them insult your entire family, and you.

2) I don't understand why it would be so terrible to mention, not use, the former name of someone that seems to make no attempt to distance themselves from that former name.
Click to expand...

As a cisgendered guy, I won't speak much to this, except to say that I know that quite a few trans people consider it to be extremely rude.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Does deadnaming apply only transgendered people? I have a friend who is fine with her birth-gender, but desperately hated her birth name. As soon as she turned 18 she had it legally changed.

Would I be in violation of a sacrosanct social edict if I referred to the name that her parents assigned her at birth?

These are the things I need to know, if I have any ope of successfully navigating this field of oversensitive triggers with which I find myself surrounded...
Click to expand...
Well that "birth name" isn't her name any longer so why would you be so rude to use it?
 
crescent said:
However, the author in question has been excoriated for saying (more or less):

She was once known as Bruce

The author did not use male pronouns to describe Jenner, only once mentioning Jenner's previous (and very famous) name. For which the author is now facing severe repercussions by her colleagues.

Based upon this reaction, it is clear that the very mention of the previous existence of a person named "Bruce Jenner" is grossly unacceptable; deadnaming.


The question is: Who won the gold medal in the decathlon in the 1976 Olympics?
Click to expand...
If you asked her I'm sure she will tell you that she won the medal.
 
Darat said:
Well that "birth name" isn't her name any longer so why would you be so rude to use it?
Click to expand...

Because if I talk to someone who knew her ages ago they won't know who the heck I'm talking about if I use her current name.

On a related topic... if a person gets married and takes their spouse's last name... is it considered appallingly rude to reference their original surname?

In case it's too opaque, the point here is that referencing the name that a person used to go by isn't necessarily rude. Continuing to call them by that name when interacting with them would be rude.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Because if I talk to someone who knew her ages ago they won't know who the heck I'm talking about if I use her current name.

On a related topic... if a person gets married and takes their spouse's last name... is it considered appallingly rude to reference their original surname?

In case it's too opaque, the point here is that referencing the name that a person used to go by isn't necessarily rude. Continuing to call them by that name when interacting with them would be rude.
Click to expand...

Is "offense does not require intent" logic.

Instead of thinking if the person was attempting to be offensive, and reacting accordingly, and slight is treated as if it was an intended offense.

So those that are trying to be offensive have no penalty, and those either stumbling on words or discussing sensitive topics are crucified.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Does deadnaming apply only transgendered people? I have a friend who is fine with her birth-gender, but desperately hated her birth name. As soon as she turned 18 she had it legally changed.

Would I be in violation of a sacrosanct social edict if I referred to the name that her parents assigned her at birth?

These are the things I need to know, if I have any ope of successfully navigating this field of oversensitive triggers with which I find myself surrounded...
Click to expand...
One of my children changed their name when they reached adulthood.
In my case all that happens is that I forget and call them by their birth name, they correct me, everything is fine and no one gets dramatic about it.

Some people just like the drama of blowing everything up into a thing, I suspect they watch too many soaps (too much Eastenders).
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Because if I talk to someone who knew her ages ago they won't know who the heck I'm talking about if I use her current name.

On a related topic... if a person gets married and takes their spouse's last name... is it considered appallingly rude to reference their original surname?

In case it's too opaque, the point here is that referencing the name that a person used to go by isn't necessarily rude. Continuing to call them by that name when interacting with them would be rude.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right.

As a non-trans person, I have no idea what that feels like. It's not just a name, it's an entire identity. I would wager that a lot of this comes from the fact that people (family, friends, acquaintances) who refuse to use their changed name are also denying their identity. It comes with a great deal of pain.

That being said, I would also suggest that the rules are somewhat different with celebrities and historical figures. Caitlyn Jenner - the only transperson "deadnamed" in the piece - won a gold medal under another name, and historically, that name continues to exist in all manner of places. She has, herself, referred to her prior name in very public ways. Chelsea Manning underwent trial and there are endless contemporary news articles that use her previous name when discussing that situation.

If, for example, you did a Lexis search for Caitlyn and Chelsea, you would not be able to access a great bit of information. Their previous names will continue to be used, and there isn't a whole lot that can been done about that. Honoring their new names and identities going forward is, of course, the respectful thing to do.
 
sadhatter said:
I'm starting to realize this is just the eb and flow of history.

Conservative religious values held power for so long that questioning them became taboo. Now that liberal secular values have gained power we are doing the same thing.

I can only hope that eventually we realize it isn't the values that are the problem, but one side of a political spectrum having a disproportionate amount of power.

And this way, we will never really progress, one group will simply be **** upon, rally, gain power then **** upon the next group. An easy way to do this is to stop doing the garbage you hate the other side doing. But no one really wants to do that. They want to have their moment to stick it to those who have been wronging them.
Click to expand...

The most recent video by Laci Green made a similar comment regarding the parallels between left-of-center calls to ban 'hate speech' and right-of-center calls to ban sex education. They also weigh in on the Hypatia issue at the end.

It is a refreshingly good call for dialog between various groups. The recommended videos contain responses from both sides of the SJW/anti-SJW community.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ1ga8yuM50
 
Some interesting articles on the case courtesy of an Anti-Trump philiosopher

(I skimmed the last years worth of posts on his blog to confirm this.)

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/bl...-behind-publicatoin-of-the-tuvel-article.html


http://leiterreports.typepad.com/bl...alling-on-hypatia-to-retract-her-article.html

And an interesting article on this affair and what it could mean (Though I make no claims about the ideological credentials of this author.):

Academic philosophers have finally found a line they’re willing to hold against the discipline’s social justice contingent.

They hadn’t reached the line yet when bloggers started brigading against conferences where only male invitees had accepted invitations.

...

They hadn’t reached the line yet when academic “advocates” cowed prominent philosophers into writing struggle-session apologies or including phrases like “I think I am a good ally” – in papers about fundamental metaphysics.

But now Hypatia, a journal of feminist philosophy with explicitly activist goals, has seemingly disavowed a paper comparing claims about racial identity to claims about gender identity, and philosophers seem to have had enough.
Click to expand...

http://quillette.com/2017/05/09/line-sand-academic-philosophy/

Later: From the same website a commentary on the Laci Green video I posted.

quillette.com/2017/05/13/laci-green-matrix-future-free-speech/
 
Last edited:
Graham2001 said:
Later: From the same website a commentary on the Laci Green video I posted.

quillette.com/2017/05/13/laci-green-matrix-future-free-speech/
Click to expand...

I particularly liked the analysis of Laci Green's video. It raises a lot of salient points about the trajectory of our society right now. It is of course confirmation bias, but it wraps up in a way that echoes my own views somewhat.

If she thinks she can present diversity of opinion, with appeals to science, and be met with acceptance and rational discussion by her previous in-group, she may find herself in for a rude awakening. And unfortunately, this is exactly where we are at as a society. Isolated pockets of small groups policing the ideas and language of others. To Laci’s credit, she is courageous enough to speak out in congruence with her values. But most will just shut up and remain silenced in their own private Kafkaesque nightmare.
Click to expand...
 
Emily's Cat said:
On a related topic... if a person gets married and takes their spouse's last name... is it considered appallingly rude to reference their original surname?

...

Continuing to call them by that name when interacting with them would be rude.
Click to expand...

Nothing is clear cut I'm afraid, I have a colleague who changed her name when she married (second time she has changed her name).

She prefers that we use her previous family name at work (from her first marriage).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom